Owners get their stay; Lockout still on
The Philadelphia Inquirer Blog - Eagles
Owners get their stay; Lockout still on
Jeff McLane, Inquirer Staff Writer
The NFL strikes back.
The league's owners received a favorable ruling today when the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals granted a permanent stay on an earlier ruling lifting the lockout until an appeal is heard June 3.
The 2-1 decision was the same as the panel's earlier decision that gave the owners a temporary stay in late April during the draft. The appellate court said it believed the NFL has proven it will " likely suffer irreparable harm without a stay."
The ruling seemingly tilts the ball in the owners' favor as the work stoppage extends into its third month. With the lockout still on at least until early June it is likely that teams such as the Eagles will not have mini-camps.
It also means that free agency or any trades -- such as one that would involve Eagles backup quarterback Kevin Kolb -- will continue to be put on hold for the time being.
You can read the court's ruling here.
More coverage
Have your say: Grade the Eagles' draft
Buy Eagles tickets Comments (30)
ahhhhhaaaaaa.....busted. Liberal activist Judge Nelson just got clotheslined by the Appellate Division.— blaqjaq- Well at least Judge Nelson still has her Autographed Manning, Brees and Brady Game Jersey's!— younged
- Im confused. Is the liberal activist judge pro millionaire players or pro billionaire owners? Cut this nonsense and just bring back football!— dragoon6
- This is going to end badly for players and owners if they don't get a new deal done and fast. How destructive is it to a sport to lose a season? Ask the NHL, hell ask MLB what its like to lose even part of a season remember 1994?— paulNC
Comment removed.- Oh, you are so very wrong sir...I can gorge my "fat face" with or without football. — Gray Areas
- The owners better be careful what they wish for. I believe the players will sit out a season to send a message to the owners. The owners still have bills to pay and without a season do not have revenue. I don't believe it is a slam-dunk for the players, but I think the owners are showing hubris if they think the players will capitulate to their demands. I believe the chances are increasing of either a full season without football, a shortened season due to a late compromise and a poor product as most players will not have the benefit of training camp or injuries galore as a season is thrown away without the proper player preparation. This is a showdown of which side can out-bluff the other side.— RunningTheBases
- Dude, there are 32 very rich, and unified owners...let me repeat, all very rich. There are approx 1600 "not nearly as rich" selfish players most of whom lose a large portion of their personal worth without football for even one year. By selfish I mean they care about themselves more than they care about the union. The owners would sit the year, the players can't and won't. The players are relying on the judicial branch of government to get what they want. — Gray Areas
- Comment removed.
- Dudes, you're both forgetting the owners are the ones who are in serious debt with their fancy new stadiums, and with no league revenue, they run the risk of defaulting on their loan payments.
"Selfish players"? They're not the ones asking for more money, it's the owners. Why? Because the owners put themselves in debt with these monstrosities they call stadiums, and now they need to dip into the players % of the revenue to cover up their greed.
"These players are NOT interested in the next generation of NFL Players"? Don't get it twisted, it has been the owners who, up until recently, completely ignored the fact about the physical damage pro football had on it's players, and who made no attempt whatsoever to provide these ex-NFL players with the proper health care that they so desperately needed...see Johnny Unitas.
Anybody who sides with the owners on this has got the wool completely pulled over their eyes. Make no mistake, the owners are asking for more money because of their own greed, nothing else.
Take a look around, this sort of thing is happening all over the place. - Not all the owners have it so well, either. Why are the Bills playing football in Canada? Why did Jacksonville put sheets over the upper levels of their stadium and are constantly mentioned as a candidate to move to LA? Laurie and Jones a few other are printing money but trust me they would all suffer if they lost a season of football. — coloradoeagle
- Good...less money out of my pocket this year...at least MLB could juice the ball and allow a steroids-fueled HR derby to get fans back in the seats...the NFL has no such emergency plan.— 2ndNlong
- The Players will not capitulate because there is a lockout. All this ruling does is allow the owners to cancel games and keep the players from getting checks. Do they really want to go there? Do they really want to test the players resolve? Do they really want to cancel the first four games....and maybe more? I hope the players stiff these greedy b**tards.— greenflyer
- If you haven't already, invest in a nice flat big screen........and yes, I do feel bad for the Concession,Maitenance,etc. workers who depend on these jobs. Unfortunately, they as well as the fans will suffer! If and when they come to an agreement, prices will no doubt increase! The owners and players will lose nothing!— Geno D
- Who cares. The greed of these people is getting old. The only ones who lose hear are the fans, which hold all the power but will continue to give their money to these B******s— eaglesman1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Birds' Eye View is the Inquirer's blog covering all things Philadelphia Eagles and the NFL.
Jeff McLane
Inquirer Staff Writer
Zach Berman
Inquirer Staff Writer
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners:
Powered By:
